1. BARACK OBAMA AND THE POLITICS OF HOPE (?)

2. RATIONALES FOR ALTERNATIVES U.S. loss of “soft power” Continuing frustration in Latin America Importance of Latin America to U.S. Change of U.S. administration as result of presidential election

3. WHAT DRIVES FOREIGN POLICY? Generosity Friendship Proximity Repayment of historical debt –Or Self-centered national interest.

4. CLASSICAL REALISM 1. The international system is anarchical. 2. Sovereign states are principal actors. 3. States are rational actors, pursuing national interests, and are in competition with one another. 4. Overriding goals are survival and security—best guaranteed by military power. 5. Constraints achieved by resistance of other powers, not by treaties or friendship.

5. “PROGRESSIVE” REALISM 1. International system not anarchical but structured, as through “regimes.” 2. Nonstate actors and international organizations play significant roles. 3. State preferences vary from time to time, place to place. 4. States are not inherently aggressive or competitive; preferences can change. 5. Cooperation can yield mutual gains for participating states.

6. FUNDAMENTAL DIFFERENCES 1. Nature of power: “hard” vs. “soft.” 2. Sovereignty and internal vs. international domains. 3. War vs. peace. 4. Importance of democracy. 5. Value of international cooperation, institutions. 6. American power: extent vs. limits.

7. WHAT WOULD IT TAKE? 1. Election of a president with personal commitment to progressive paradigm and a strong interest in Latin America. 2. Events within region that demand U.S. attention— e.g., spread of pink tide or launching of terrorist attack. 3. World developments that focus attention on Latin America—e.g., “clash of civilizations.” 4. Demographic and political changes within the United States.

8. And the outlook is…..?

9. THE OBAMA RECORD Exaggerated expectations Intervening priorities, domestic (economy) and international (Afghanistan) Hesitant beginnings (Trinidad & Tobago ≠ Cairo) Nuanced view of Latin America

10. CURRENT ISSUES Honduras: questionable commitment to democracy Colombia: military bases Cuba: admission to OAS, Guantánamo Points of tension: –Venezuela –Bolivia –“Pink tide” in general

11. HONDURAS 2005-06 Manuel Zelaya elected 2008Joins ALBA (and Hugo Chávez) 2009: 6/28 Ousted, Roberto Micheletti takes power 7/05Honduras suspended by OAS 09MZ returns to Honduras 11/29Porfirio Lobo elected (56.6% vote) 2010: JanMZ exile in Dominican Republic JulyU.S. urges readmission to OAS Aug Mexico, Chile extend recognition

12. BRAZIL Differences over Honduras, Cuba, Chávez Ties to Iran, diplomatic initiatives Trade: WTO suit, agricultural protectionism (e.g. sugar, oranges, ethanol) Perceptions of power, relationship Shift from Lula to Dilma Rousseff?

13. CUBA (2011) Restores Clinton emphasis on “people to people” contacts Embargo exemptions for humanitarian, religious, academic purposes More flights (chartered) Remittances of $500 per quarter Context: –Private market in Cuba, reduced role of state –Emergence of civil society –Republican takeover of House of Representatives –New generation of Cuban-Americans

14. USA and Latin America: Comparative and Historical Perspective _________Latin America as Priority___________ ______ Low _______ _______ High _____ Operational Mode for U.S. ____ Unilateral Ad hoc Systematic imposition intervention (Bush 2001-09) (Reagan 1981-89) ________________________ __________________ Intermittent, Consistent, Multilateral low-level high-level diplomacy engagement (Clinton 1993-2000) (Kennedy 1961-63) ____________________________________________________________

15. Rank-Order Preferences for U.S. Policy ___ Partners___ __Targets___ U.S. Policy (Mexico, (Cuba, __Rivals___ ___Bystanders__ __Configuration__ _Bush II__ __Colombia)__ __Venezuela)__ __(Brazil?)__ ___(Others)____ Low priority 1 4 2 1 4 + Unilateral Low priority 2 3 1 2 2 + Multilateral High priority 3 1 4 4 3 + Unilateral High priority 4 2 3 3 1 + Multilateral Note: As presented here, ordinal rankings mean that 1 stands for the first-place (most preferable) choice, 2 for the second-place choice, 3 for the third-place choice, and 4 for the fourth-place (least preferable) choice. Question: Where to place Obama?